StoneMtn

This is one of my favourite bands going.

Now there's an interesting one. Probably about the size of my old high-school campus, and obviously no Customs / Immigration to report to, so I guess ownership is an issue yet to be worked out between Denmark and Canada. It sure would be interesting to see what would happen if oil was discovered on Hans Island, or something worth fighting over.

I just find this all fascinating.

Perhaps, then, you are the second-most geographically impaired person you know.

Okay, I just learned that about a 15-minute sail from Newfoundland are some islands called "St. Pierre-Miquelon", which are actually owned by France. Newfoundlanders need a passport to sail over.

This made me think ... Are there other countries just off our coasts that I have never heard of? The whole time I lived out west I never heard of an island owned by anyone other than Canada or the US off that coast, but who knows?

Anyone?

Actually, they do that initially when they stop you. I am talking about later, upon conviction.

Who would choose to wear particular clothes, different than their normal clothes, becaue they now have a kid? That would be ridiculous, unless you were embarrassed about your former clothing.

So .... "no". Of course not.

I don't know about Nova Scotia, but in Ontario the fine is a max of 10 grand. In real life, though, in Court, it's a slap on the wrist.

RIP My friend.

Here are a couple of articles on Canadian copyright law, if you're interested. They aren't directly on point with what you asked, but may be of interest.

They are really about copyright and the Internet, and were written long enough ago that they were "speculative" at the time, but basically all speculations turned out to be right:

Copyright Law in the Digital Age

WeStealYourIntellectualProperty.com

Photo from last year posted on the ad:

Join the merchants and artisans of Main Street Markham as they celebrate the significant heritage and culture of the original historic Downtown Markham as it was before the days of the automobile!

Featuring:

Auto Showcase

International Food

Variety Booths

http://www.mainstreetmarkham.com/page.asp?pageid=469

Yes, but the only officially recognized registration of copyright in Canada is through CIPO. The rest is all evidence to prove you created something first, which goes to attacking someone else's alleged copyright. If you can show you created it, you may be able to defeat a registered copyright. Remember, I said it's a "rebuttable presumption".

(Of course, you could have assigned copyright, too, so that isn't the end of the story.)

SOCAN is a whole other matter. That is not the law of copyright. It's a mechanism for paying copyright holders.

If you want to get "official", though, you can also register with the Copyright Branch of the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO). http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/h_wr00003.html

There's a rebuttable presumption that the party registered holds the copyright to the work. (Sending yourself a copy through registered mail is known as the "poor man's copyright". It is not actually doing anything to register your copyright. It is simply creating evidence to use if you ever need to fight it out later.)

I'd be soooooo into that, A.D..

Acoustic, jocular American Made and Duty Free? Gold!

Uch! D'uh. Thanks Scot. I was having a mental block and thinking Deaner, who I'd much rather see.

Oh well.

Really???

Is he playing Moistboyz stuff?

United Airlines Song Background (short version)

In the spring of 2008, Sons of Maxwell were traveling to Nebraska for a one-week tour and my Taylor guitar was witnessed being thrown by United Airlines baggage handlers in Chicago. I discovered later that the $3500 guitar was severely damaged. They didn’t deny the experience occurred but for nine months the various people I communicated with put the responsibility for dealing with the damage on everyone other than themselves and finally said they would do nothing to compensate me for my loss. So I promised the last person to finally say “no†to compensation (Ms. Irlweg) that I would write and produce three songs about my experience with United Airlines and make videos for each to be viewed online by anyone in the world. United: Song 1 is the first of those songs. United: Song 2 has been written and video production is underway. United: Song 3 is coming. I promise.

(Click here for long, detailed version of the story.)

Video:

I have a new Indian client (East Indian) who, of course, has a very Indian-sounding name.

He has a company that he named after two last names - his own, and one that sounds very British. He finds that having the British-sounding name in his company is good for marketing.

He is incorporating a new company. It will be named after himself, and a very Jewish-sounding name, for the same reason.

What do you think? Is he tolerating racism against his own people? Perpetuating racism regarding Brits and Jews? Is he just a pragmatist?

If you met the guy, you certainly wouldn't think of him as racist. I found him very interesting.

This article sounds like great news ... until you get to the reality-check at the end. Hopefully they make good on this promise.

G8 summit to pledge $15 billion to boost food supply

By Darren Ennis

L'AQUILA, Italy (Reuters) - Leaders from rich nations at the G8 summit in Italy will commit $15 billion over three years to spur agricultural investment in poorer countries and combat hunger, a final draft statement seen by Reuters said.

The text, to be issued after talks Friday, did not make clear whether it was all new funds, nor did it give details of individual countries' contributions, although the United States, Japan and the European Union (EU) are expected to step in with around $3 billion each.

It also made no mention of a trust fund for the contributions to be managed by the World Bank, a proposal put forward by Washington in previous drafts but opposed by the EU.

"We welcome the commitments made by countries represented at L'Aquila toward a goal of mobilizing at least $15 billion over three years," the statement said.

"We are committed to increase investments in short, medium and long-term agriculture development that directly benefits the poorest and makes best use of international institutions," it added.

It said the combined effect of longstanding underinvestment in agriculture, price volatility and the economic crisis had led to increased poverty and hunger in developing countries.

The United Nations says the number of malnourished people has risen over the past two years and is expected to top 1.02 billion this year, reversing a four-decade trend of declines.

The statement said the G8 summit kept a strong commitment to ensure adequate emergency food assistance, but its focus on agricultural investments reflects a U.S.-led shift toward longer-term strategies to fight hunger.

The United States is the world's largest aid donor of food -- mostly grown domestically and bought from U.S. farmers.

The leaders said their approach would target increased agriculture productivity, stimulus to harvest interventions, emphasis on private sector growth, women and smallholders, preservation of natural resources, job expansion, training and increased trade flows.

The announced $15 billion in funds over three years compares with $13.4 billion which the G8 says it disbursed between January 2008 and July 2009 for global food security.

"The tendency of decreasing ODA (official development assistance) and national financing to agriculture must be reversed," the draft statement said.

G8 summits have a history of making unkept aid promises. In a report last month, anti-poverty group ONE said the world's richest nations collectively were off course in delivering on promises to more than double aid to Africa made at a G8 summit in 2005.

ONE has calculated that sub-Saharan Africa alone needs $25 billion over three years.

"Investment in seeds, fertilizer, roads and other infrastructure is desperately needed," it said Thursday.

(Additional reporting by Silvia Aloisi; editing by Michael Roddy)

http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE5686AB20090709

I once saw a guy yell to a girl in a loud bar:

"Do you want to come and dance?"

"Not with you!"

"Huh? What do you think I just asked you?"

"If I want to dance."

"Oh! No. I said you look fat in those pants!"

Right. Which was obviously supplemented by a clear acknowledgment that the very comment you glommed on to was a good one. I acknowledged that before you posted.

It amuses me that I acknowledged Dima's point at the very beginning of this thread, which I specifically said is a good point, yet people skip that part and decide to refer to me as exhibiting "righteous indignation", with others sheepishly supporting that unfounded remark.

My only indignation is regarding inattention to detail. Read before you post.

Actually, Dima, your point is well taken (as is MoMack's as well, though). I agree that the real issue here is parenting. I guess it's fair to say that this house was not exactly "baby-proofed" for safety.

Girl, 3, shoots dead two-year old brother

28/05/2009 - 10:27:58

A boy of two has died after being accidentally shot by his three-year-old sister.

Police in Bakersfield, California said the girl apparently found a .45 calibre semiautomatic handgun under her parents’ bed and accidentally shot her brother.

The wounded boy was taken to hospital where he was later pronounced dead.

Police say the children’s mother was in another room in their apartment at the time of the shooting. Their father was at work.

The investigation is continuing.

Link